Petitioner challenged nominees via Collector on ground of false affidavit, but Collector lacked jurisdiction and remedy existed under Act.
Writ petition dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
04.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
4 WRIT PETITION NO. 6402 OF 2016
GANESH HARIBHAU KHANDVE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Advocate for Petitioners : Mr.Kakde Yuvraj V.
AGP for Respondents State: Mr. M. B. Bharaswadkar
CORAM: R. M. BORDE &
K. L. WADANE, JJ.
DATE:
23th June, 2016
ORDER:
1.Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. The petitioner alleges that respondent No.5 has
presented false affidavit alongwith nomination papers.
Respondent No.5 failed to disclose details of
offences, if any, registered against him as well as
details of criminal cases, if any, pending against him
in the Court of law.
3. The petitioner tendered an application to
respondent No.2- the Collector, Ahmednagar seeking
disqualification of respondent No.5. However, the
application has been rejected by the Collector on the
ground of want of jurisdiction. We did not find any
infirmity in the order passed by the Collector. It was
1/2
04.odt
permissible for the petitioner to avail the appropriate
remedy provided under the Act. Having failed to avail
the remedy provided under the law, the petitioner
approached the Collector, who does not have
jurisdiction to take cognizance of the application.
4. No interference is called for. Writ petition
stands dismissed.
(K. L. WADANE, J.) (R. M. BORDE, J. )
JPC
2/2
GANESH HARIBHAU KHANDVE
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
R. M. BORDE
K. L. WADANE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court